Law school and beyond for an old timer.

Graduate School Law School
1

<p>Alright, my title is slightly facetious, but I recognize that I am at least a decade behind in this game. I have a few questions, and I spent a fair amount of time looking through old posts and searching these forums without luck; however, I am really impressed with some of the regular posters on this site and the workmanlike way in which they patiently respond to repeat questions again and again. And again. (And again.) </p>

<p>1) I understand that law schools look at your overall GPA. As far as I can tell from the posts in this forum, junior college is not weighted any differently than a four year university. So if one had 100 units at a junior college with a 3.9 average and 100 units at a four year university with a 3.7 average, then the number that would show up on law school applications is 3.8, yes? (Just want to clarify that, and that is also very close to my actual situation.)</p>

<p>2) Assuming I am correct in how one's GPA is weighted, does anyone know whether or not the law school GPA calculation will include retaken Fs? I have a few Fs from around 15 years ago on my community college transcript. When I retook those classes, a few years ago, the junior college was good enough to stop counting the original Fs as part of my GPA, and only calculate the updated As. Will LSAC or whomever calculates my overall GPA be as accommodating?</p>

<p>3) This may be a bit more difficult to answer, but does anyone think that it's simply not worthwhile to pursue a t14 if one is in one's thirties? I've read numerous posts on this site bemoaning the current lawyer glut and poor economy in general, but the consensus seems to be that if you do well at a t14, then you're still in good shape. Of course, just about everyone asking is in their early twenties. Now, I know that prestigious firm X wants the 25-year-old fresh out of Harvard, but what about the 37-year-old or the 40-year-old? I guess what I'm asking is this: all other things being equal, is my age going to impede me? If it is, and if I'm going to be limited to government gigs, public defender and the like, regardless (due to my age), then I'd probably be better off going a different route than t14 even if I were able to get in. (e.g., a government job and law school on the side, as people often do.)</p>

<p>I suppose I should add that I'm not a URM, and I have had very little work experience to speak of. I spent the decade after high school traveling aimlessly and working odd jobs, and I only just returned to school a few years ago. Even still, and in spite of my age, I was thinking that with my respectable GPA coupled with a decent LSAT--I'm averaging around 170 on practice LSATs under test conditions--I'd have a shot at a decent law school, but I can't decide whether or not that'd be the best move anyway.</p>

<p>Thanks for your time.</p>

2

<ol>
<li><p>Yes, but…LSDAS will calculate an overall gpa, but it will also break it down by institution and year. </p></li>
<li><p>If the Fs appear on your transcript, they will be included in your gpa. </p></li>
<li><p>I don’t really understand your question the way you have formulated it. Many people do go to LS later and succeed. I don’t know why anyone would think that prestigious firm x would want the 25 year old straight out of Harvard. I think that it would much prefer the 30 year old who spent 5 years in the military. Your problem, though, seems to be that you don’t have much to show for the years before you went to college. I don’t have any personal knowledge as to how a law firm would look at your resume, but I think that might be more of an issue than your chronological age. Based solely on what you’ve posted, you don’t seem to add a whole lot of “value added” vs. that 25 year old. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>Unless you can get a lot of merit money or have a cheap public night law school available, I don’t see why you think it would be better to go to a lower ranked LS. T!4 law schools don’t cost more than most law schools. Moreover, since you are old enough that your parents’ income won’t count, you’re more likely to get good need-based financial aid from a top law school. </p>

<p>Why not apply to a range of law schools, ask for both fin and merit aid and see the results before you make any decisions as to the type of LS you should attend?</p>

<p>If you are currently enrolled in a 4 year college, I’d also highly recommend you go see the pre-law adviser, who will probably be more help than this board.</p>

3

<p>Thank you for the thoughtful response. Inclusion of those Fs is a major blow–I think that pretty much rules out t14 short of some sort of LSAT miracle. It also seems a little counter-intuitive. Consider the following:</p>

<p>Student A fails a difficult class. He takes that same class again and gets an A.<br>
Student B fails a difficult class. Instead of retaking that class, he just skips it, and gets an A in a different, easier class.</p>

<p>Making no distinction between students A and B seems a little wrong to me.</p>

<p>On point #3:</p>

<p>A friend’s sister is a public defender. I haven’t spoken with her at length, but she is the one that raised this notion in my head of the hard and fast age discrimination. Even with a good work history, she thinks the big law firms will still prefer the fresh-faced and wide-eyed 25 year old, simply because they think they can work them harder. That is what I wanted other opinions on.</p>

<p>You are correct, however, that my case is even worse than normal–I don’t have any value added. And you seem to be agreeing that this is a problem.</p>

<p>As far as cost goes, I’ve seen several, in-state, lower ranked schools at 1/3rd the cost of t14, and they probably allow for more time working, furthermore. But that’s just a guess.</p>

<p>In terms of the quality of help on this board, well, I like the input that I have seen so far. I am interested in a variety of opinions, raw or otherwise. Just call me Gallup. And all other things being equal, people are a little more candid online. Sometimes the “official” response isn’t the most accurate one.</p>

4

<p>You could frame it differently.</p>

<p>Student A fails a class despite having an entire semester to learn the material. He goes on to repeat the exact same course covering virtually the exact same material and manages to learn it correctly… the second time around.</p>

<p>Student B fails the same class. He then goes on to take a different course, covering different material, with a different professor. He excels in this course.</p>

5

<p>Good point. I was looking at it from my own perspective, which was that I was young at the time and simply stopped going to school without dropping and consequently failed the semester without attending. And then once I had the Fs in the challenging courses, physics, etc, and went back to school 15 years later, I elected to retake those courses instead of doing, say, bowling and pottery. But that’s neither here nor there if “thems the rules.”</p>

<p>I’ve enjoyed reading hundreds of your posts in the last few nights, Bluedevil, do you have any thoughts on the rest of my quandary?</p>

<p>Edit: Would you guys recommend attempt to explain away those Fs from 94 in the statement?</p>

6

<p>Well, there’s essentially two questions at stake here when you ask, is law school worth the investment if you’re a little bit older?</p>

<p>First, do you have time to recoup the investment? This is a fairly straightforward math problem, but it requires a lot of details. What would your career look like without law school? How do you quantify the non-pecuniary benefits? Would you qualify for financial aid?</p>

<p>Second, to what extent does this limit your options? Would firms discriminate against you?</p>

<p>The first question is a pretty basic math problem, like I said, which I’d be happy to help you with if you wanted. I suspect you’d be able to do it yourself. Unfortunately, I don’t have any insight into the second.</p>

7

<p>Thanks, Bluedevil.</p>

<p>Respectfully, however, I don’t consider those issues separate at all. Indeed, they are quite linked. In my particular case, the only reason that the former would be a problem is as a result of the latter, and that’s the heart of the matter.</p>

<p>Allow me to restate my assumptions:</p>

<p>1) t14 is more expensive, more demanding, and more competitive in terms of receiving various forms of financial aid than lower tier schools.</p>

<p>2) Especially in the current economy, the big firms hire almost exclusively from the t14s.</p>

<p>3) If you are looking for a mid-level government job, you don’t necessarily need t14.</p>

<p>It thus seems to make practical and financial sense to base your college choice upon the respective options that they might provide. Sadly, it is difficult to do so without a little more insight into the hiring process as it pertains to other factors, such as age. It seems you are also in the dark, but if anyone else has a guess, I’d like to hear it.</p>

8

<p>T14’s usually aren’t more expensive than their counterparts. I was just looking at an unaccredited program which is about $5,000 a year cheaper than my school. Not sure how much more demanding they are, for that matter. They’re better about need-based aid but worse about merit aid.</p>

<p>What I meant with the first question is that you have a shorter horizon over which to recoup your investment than many students. That affects the matter some. Like you said, though, the answer to the second question is an input into the first.</p>

<p>Perhaps I should have reversed the order.</p>

9

<ol>
<li>Isn’t really accurate. The top private LSs are more generous with NEED BASED financial aid. Lower ranked LSs as a GENERAL rule, use their funds to attract students with better stats or who will add diversity and your stats are more likely to yield $ than your poverty. Additionally,top LSs as a GENERAL rule have better loan forgiveness programs, so that if you DO take a lower paying job, all or a portion of the loan will be forgiven. Lower ranked schools rarely have such programs. </li>
</ol>

<p>It you’re talking public U law schools in-state, yes they can be cheaper. But there’s not much difference in cost between lower ranked privates and highly ranked privates. Get a copy of USNews and take a look at the cost figures. </p>

<ol>
<li><p>You haven’t even applied yet–nobody knows what the legal market will be like when you finish LS. There are always exceptions. Most big law firms hire folks from more lowly ranked LSs. However, you usually have to be at the very top of the class or have some special skill–like you’re a CPA who wants to be a tax attorney or have some “connection.” (Your father is the general counsel at a Fortune 500 Company and can throw business your way, etc.) A much smaller percentage of folks at lower ranked schools can get big firm jobs. </p></li>
<li><p>Fed or state government? Which state? Which agency? It’s all supply and demand. When the economy is lousy, more folks go after government jobs. You don’t need a T14 degree to get a job in state government, especially outside major legal markets. But it doesn’t hurt to have gone to a better LS. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>I think you’re thinking too much about age here. No firm is going to say we won’t hire you because you’re 35. Among other things, that’s illegal. And, given a choice between a 35 year old grad of Harvard and one of Western New England Law, I think the Harvard grad would get the job if everything else were equal. </p>

<p>I don’t “get” why your source thinks that being older would be more of a problem at a law firm than it would be at a government agency. Senior partners who are 50+ years old may have less of a problem dealing with a 35 year old junior associate than a 30 year old deputy bureau chief will have dealing with a newbie who is younger than he is. </p>

<p>Does your university have a law school affiliated with it? If so, why not go ask the dean of admissions or someone in career services about your concerns?</p>

<p>Finally…and this may seem rude…but why do you want to be a lawyer? Answering that question may be the key to your dilemna. If you’ve gone back to school, gotten a degree, and haven’t landed a job–or fear that you won’t be able to when you graduate, you may see going ahead to get a law degree as giving you financial security. It won’t. </p>

<p>If on the other hand, you have a valid reason why you feel strongly that law is the career for you, than going into debt to do it may be well worth it. To me, the equation of whether this is worth it depends on WHY you want to do it. Lots of people who go to LS late have really good reasons. They usually arise out of the experience they’ve had–a cop who wants to be a prosecutor, for example or a nurse I know who defends hospitals as an attorney now.
Your posts suggest there’s no such reason for your interest in law–but I may be WAY off base.</p>

10

<p>You’re not at all rude or off base. I think that you raise interesting points, and I appreciate your input. I was indeed referring to lower tier, public schools, but perhaps the difference is not as much as I imagined for the reasons that you and Bluedevil have already stated, in which case I should simply apply to the best schools that I am a reasonable candidate for.</p>

<p>“I think you’re thinking too much about age here. No firm is going to say we won’t hire you because you’re 35. Among other things, that’s illegal.”</p>

<p>Let’s call 35 40. But I wasn’t afraid of them saying it. I’m afraid of them just not saying anything at all. And that’s precisely why it’s hard to get a straight answer on this.</p>

11

<p>I think that your age at graduation from law school will matter more or less depending on who you would like your employer to be.</p>

<p>If you are thinking of working in BIGLAW and trying to obtain the largest salary available to young associates, you may have some difficulty due to your age combined with your inexperience. While there are certainly older junior associates at many BIGLAW firms, many, if not most, of them are second career lawyers, who have worked in another field for many years and often have something additional to add to the mix (and, in my experience, many of these second career junior associates do very well and are very successful). However, at an older age and with little job experience under your belt, you will have a number of obstacles to overcome.</p>

<p>First, you will have to provide a cogent explanation of why you are choosing to attend law school now, and why you want a career in law.</p>

<p>Second, you will have to provide a good explanation of how you spent the years that have passed before attending law school.</p>

<p>Finally, you will have to prove that you are willing to work the extremely long and unpredictable hours and do the grunt work that is often required of junior associates, all while taking direction from more senior attorneys who may well be significantly younger than you are. </p>

<p>As an older law student without a prior career, you will have a lot of baseline explaining to do before you would likely be seriously considered as a candidate for BIGLAW.</p>

<p>I imagine that a similar analysis would apply to high profile government jobs (federal jobs and prestigious local jobs (e.g. ADA in a big city) and desirable public interest positions.</p>